The Vienna Settlement (1814-1815) was made up of not one but three sets of negotiations. The First Treaty of Paris (May 1814), which was made just after the French Revolution, was convened to prevent Europe before French expansion. The Treaty forced Napoleon to abdication and he was send to/on the Elba. The Congress of Vienna – which was a conference between ambassadors of the most powerful countries in Europe – went on November 1814 to June 1815. It was until the Napoleon had run off from Elba and interrupted the Congress with his ‘100days’. The Congress indeed did not make any decisions not related to borders and new order in Europe except banishing slave trade in France. The main aim for Europe was prevent countries before France and preserving the peace. After Napoleon’s ‘100 Days’, when the battle of Waterloo was his great defeat, countries assembled once again on the Second Treaty of Paris (November 1815). Monarchs reduced France o its 1790 boundaries and ordered it to pay indemnity. As everything, the Vienna Settlement had it bad and good sides and this is what made a dispute between historians.
The Settlement was hugely criticized by the historians, who had lived in the 19-th century. According to the liberalism and nationalism, arrangements made in 1814-1815 were ‘backward-looking’ and not popular. Lord Greville, the member of the Cabinet in England was firmly against it and said that he must have been ‘seduced by his vanity’ to have agreed with such an arrangement. England was the country of liberalism, so it was nothing new that in 1817 in the Black Dwarf you could read complains of the legitimacy, which went awry for the public opinion. (tzn ta legitimacy nie była po myśli) First of all, the most reasons for complaining had the France. The Bourbon monarch was restore, Napoleon was unduly punished and exiled, and also they blamed the Vienna Settlement for the next revolutions. Antonin Debidour, the Frenchman, wrote that the allies ‘consulted only...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document